Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Red Teaming”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2024

Generative Artificial Intelligence Tools for Red Teams

This document analyzes the role of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) tools in cybersecurity, particularly for red teaming. While GenAI accelerates initial security assessments, its effectiveness wanes with complexity, necessitating experienced assessors. The review critiques marketing claims, highlights ethical concerns regarding uncensored models for cybercrime, and advocates for a robust defense strategy supported by skilled professionals.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗
NASA NTRS2000

STS-99 Crew Activities Report / Flight Day 08 Highlights

Live footage shows the Red Team of STS-99, Commander Kevin R. Kregel and Mission Specialists Janet L. Kavandi and Gerhard P.J. Thiele, participating in interviews with the Launch Control Center (LCC). Kregel discusses the mapping system, and Thiele speaks about the antenna. The Red Team completes the flight cast maneuver for the day. Footage also shows the Red Team, Pilot Dominic L. Pudwill Gorie and Mission Specialists Janet E. Voss and Mamoru Mohri, participating in discussion with the LCC. Voss explains how the equipment works, while Mohri and Gorie discusses the mass. Also seen is the entire crew gathered on the flight deck participating in an interview with the LCC.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2010

NASA Self-Assessment of Space Radiation Research

Space exploration involves unavoidable exposures to high-energy galactic cosmic rays whose penetration power and associated secondary radiation makes radiation shielding ineffective and cost prohibitive. NASA recognizing the possible health dangers from cosmic rays notified the U.S. Congress as early as 1959 of the need for a dedicated heavy ion accelerator to study the largely unknown biological effects of galactic cosmic rays on astronauts. Information and scientific tools to study radiation health effects expanded over the new decades as NASA exploration programs to the moon and preparations for Mars exploration were carried out. In the 1970 s through the early 1990 s a more than 3-fold increase over earlier estimates of fatal cancer risks from gamma-rays, and new knowledge of the biological dangers of high LET radiation were obtained. Other research has increased concern for degenerative risks to the central nervous system and other tissues at lower doses compared to earlier estimates. In 1996 a review by the National Academy of Sciences Space Science Board re-iterated the need for a dedicated ground-based accelerator facility capable of providing up to 2000 research hours per year to reduce uncertainties in risks projections and develop effective mitigation measures. In 1998 NASA appropriated funds for construction of a dedicated research facility and the NASA Space Radiation Laboratory (NSRL) opened for research in October of 2003. This year marks the 8th year of NSRL research were about 1000 research hours per year have been utilized. In anticipation of the approaching ten year milestone, funded investigators and selected others are invited to participate in a critical self-assessment of NSRL research progress towards NASA s goals in space radiation research. A Blue and Red Team Assessment format has been integrated into meeting posters and special plenary sessions to allow for a critical debate on the progress of the research and major gaps areas. Blue teams will highlight progress and important new knowledge gained. Red teams will challenge the Blue teams on proposed highlights and point to Gaps not considered. We will review the current space radiation Risks and Gaps under investigation at NASA, critical data sets and research highlights anticipated, and possible goals for future research at NSRL.

Cucinotta, Francis A.↗
NASA NTRS2003

STS-107 Flight Day 11 Highlights

This video shows the activities of the STS-107 crew (Rick Husband, Commander; William McCool, Pilot; Kalpana Chawla, David Brown, Michael Anderson, Laurel Clark, Mission Specialists; Ilan Ramon, Payload Specialist) during flight day 11 of the Columbia orbiter's final mission. In the video, crew members from the Blue Team (McCool, Brown, Anderson) and the Red Team (Husband, Chawla, Clark, Ramon) are shown at work on experiments in the SpaceHab RDM (Research Double Module), and performing other tasks. Much of the video is shot and narrated by Commander Husband. Mission Specialist Brown is shown operating the MEIDEX (Mediterranean Israeli Dust Experiment). Crew activities shown include making breakfast, entering sleep stations, and programming shuttle maneuvers necessary for the spaceborne experiments onboard. Earth views shown in the video include one of Egypt, Israel and Jerusalem.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2003

STS-107 Mission Highlights Resource, Part 2 of 4

This video, Part 2 of 4, shows the activities of the STS-107 crew during flight days 4 through 7 of the Columbia orbiter's final flight. The crew consists of Commander Rick Husband, Pilot William McCool, Payload Commander Michael Anderson, Mission Specialists David Brown, Kalpana Chawla, and Laurel Clark, and Payload Specialist Ilan Ramon. During the video the crew members are at work on a variety of spaceborne experiments, such as the Laminar Soot Processes (LSP) experiment, the Mediterranean Israeli Dust Experiment (MEIDEX), international student experiments, and the Structures of Flame Balls at Low Lewis-number (SOFBALL) experiment. Other crew activities recorded on the video include exercising on a bicycle, drawing blood, and answering questions from the public. A couple of scenes on the video are narrated by Clark, including one in which she gives a tour of the SPACEHAB module in the shuttle's payload bay. The video also includes a scene in which Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon addresses Ramon and the other Red Team crew members (Husband, Chawla, Clark). The Earth views shown include Saudi Arabia and the Persian Gulf; the Appalachian Mountains; Egypt, the Red Sea, and the Sinai Peninsula, and the east coast of Africa.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2000

STS-99 Flight Day Highlights and Crew Activities Report

Live footage shows the Blue Team (second of the dual shift crew), Dominic L. Pudwill Gorie, Janice E. Voss and Mamoru Mohri, beginning the first mapping swath covering a 140-mile-wide path. While Mohri conducts mapping operations, Voss and Gorie are seen participating in a news conference with correspondents from NBC and CNN. The Red Team (first of the dual shift crew), Kevin R. Kregel, Janet L. Kavandi and Gerhard P.J. Thiele, relieves the Blue Team and are seen continuing the mapping operations for this around the clock Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (SRTM). Commander Kregel is shown performing boom (mass) durability tests, calibrating the EarthCam Payload, and speaking with the Launch Control Center (LCC) about trouble shooting a bracket for better camera angle.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS1995

STS-73 Flight Day 14

On this fourteenth day of the STS-73 sixteen day mission, the crew Cmdr. Kenneth Bowersox, Pilot Kent Rominger, Payload Specialists Albert Sacco and Fred Leslie, and Mission Specialists Kathryn Thornton, Catherine 'Cady' Coleman, and Michael Lopez-Alegria are shown performing several of the spaceborne experiments onboard the United States Microgravity Lab-2 (USML-2). The experiments shown include the Drop Physics Module (DPM) experiment, the Surface Tension Driven Convection Experiment (STDCE), the Geophysical Fluid Flow Cell (GFFC) experiment, and an experiment on fuel combustion and combustion products. Bowersox, Sacco, Thornton, and Rominger (the red team) were interviewed by high school students from Worcester, Massachusetts, who asked questions regarding the mission's experiments and general questions about living in space. Earth views included a black and white image of the Earth's atmospheric boundary layers.

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2000

STS-99 Crew Activities Report/Flight Day 1 Highlights

Live footage shows the crew, Commander Kevin R. Kregel, Pilot Dominic L. Pudwill Gorie, and Mission Specialists Janet L. Kavandi, Janice E. Voss, Mamoru Mohri and Gerhard P.J. Thiele, seated in the dining room with the traditional cake. The crew is seen performing various pre-launch activities including suit-up, walk out to the Astro-van, and strap-in into the vehicle. Also seen are the retractions of the orbiter access arm and the gaseous oxygen mint hood, main engine start, booster ignition, liftoff, and separation of the solid rocket boosters. The Red Team (first of the dual shift crew) includes Kregel, Kavandi, and Thiele, who are shown conducting jet thruster firings, activating radar instruments, and deploying the boom (mass).

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2003

STS-107 Flight Day 12 Highlights

This video shows the activities of the STS-107 crew (Rick Husband, Commander; William McCool, Pilot; Kalpana Chawla, David Brown, Michael Anderson, Laurel Clark, Mission Specialists; Ilan Ramon, Payload Specialist) during flight day 12 of the Columbia orbiter's final mission. The primary activities are spaceborne experiments in the SpaceHab RDM (Research Double Module). Experiments shown in the video include SOFBALL (Structure of Flame Balls at Low Lewis-Number), an experiment to grow cancer cells in microgravity, and the STARS (Space Technology and Research Students) experiments, including bees, ants, chemical gardens, fish, and spiders. Crew Members are shown working on MIST (Water Mist Fire Suppression), a commercial experiment. Red Team crew members (Husband, Chawla, Clark, Ramon) are shown conversing through a handset with the Expedition 6 crew (Kenneth Bowersox, Commander; Donald Pettit, Nikolai Budarin; Flight Engineers) of the ISS (International Space Station).

Source record↗
NASA NTRS2021

Compass Final Report: Nuclear Electric Propulsion (NEP)-Chemical Vehicle 1.2

Many previous studies have examined sending crews to and from Mars. The most economical involved a ‘conjunction’ class whereby the crew spends around 500 days on Mars waiting for a ‘cheap’ return. The total mission time results in over a 1000-day mission duration (about 3 years). Given the current experience level of only one year on the International Space Station (ISS), it of interest to reduce that time to only two years, thus reducing risk and minimizing required Mars surface infrastructure. The Phase 1.1 Study goal was stated as follows, “Determine the feasibility of a two-year roundtrip class Mars mission concept of operation that enables boots on Mars no later than 2036.” While the Phase1 study did show feasibility for the NEP-Chemical option, the 2036 Opposition opportunity was found to stress the schedule due to proposed technology development schedules. A 2039 Opposition (which requires even more energy than the 2036 case) was chosen as representative for Phase 1.2. Phase 1.2 also sought to further refine the concept, building on the feasibility, but addressing several challenges brought by the red team and habitat team. Given the date of 2039, nearer term technologies, primarily nuclear thermal and nuclear electric were deemed as the most viable for these missions. As will be shown, the energy required to perform such a mission in only two years (for the 2039 opportunity at least) is about three times that of the three-year conjunction mission. The rocket equation shows that this mission would then require several times the propellant of the three-year mission unless the specific impulse (ISP) of the propulsion system can be increased. Based on lunar needs, a limit of five Space Launch System (SLS) launchers with 8.4m fairings was imposed for the piloted transportation portion of the mission, limiting the size of the system. When using nuclear electric propulsion, the main limiting factor was packaging the required radiator area. The higher Isp nuclear electric propulsion (NEP) system option is described herein but with a twist: in order to keep the size of radiators packageable in one SLS and use proven reactor power system technology (~1200K reactor outlet temperature and superalloy-class Brayton) the NEP system had to be combined with a chemical propulsion system. This combination of electric propulsion and high thrust chemical was found to be useful in previous design studies combining solar electric propulsion (SEP) and chemical propulsion. Such a combination allowed the low-thrust system to provide significant change in velocity (∆V) during the interplanetary portions of the mission, thereby notably reducing the ∆V required by the high thrust system to capture and depart from the Mars gravity well. Here the high thrust ‘impulsive’ system is more efficient due to the Oberth Effect. A plethora of trades, both at the mission and system level, as well as the subsystem level were performed to develop these vehicle concepts. An entire family of NEP-Chemical transportation vehicles is described herein. The main driver and the primary focus was the piloted vehicle but additional concepts for cargo were performed using the same ‘building blocks’ in order to reduce costs and provide commonality.

Nuclear Power↗
DOE OSTI2024

Does practice make perfect? Lessons learned from full-scale power system incident response exercise

While threats to the energy sector occur daily, few utilities get the opportunity to fully test out their detection and response mechanisms to advanced threats in the real world. With the high demand for reliability, few grid operators would allow execution of simulated cyber-attacks on their live systems. The DOE-funded Liberty Eclipse project offers a unique opportunity for small and large utilities and coops to practice their combined IT/OT responses to a live red team executing attacks against an isolated power system on an island in New York. Both cyber teams and power operations teams must work together to detect and respond to attacks, even restoring the power system against extreme impacts. Lessons learned from these exercises reveal key takeaways for understanding what a real attack against the electric sector will look like, gaps in execution of the best-laid plans when the pressure of a real event is bearing down, and how organizations can better prepare for advanced attacks by optimizing participation in exercises. This presentation will discuss successes and opportunities for improvement both in how utilities can prepare for and respond to events, as well as how full-scale IT/OT exercises can be coordinated.

24 POWER TRANSMISSION AND DISTRIBUTION↗
NASA NTRS1994

Re-engineering NASA's space communications to remain viable in a constrained fiscal environment

Along with the Red and Blue Teams commissioned by the NASA Administrator in 1992, NASA's Associate Administrator for Space Communications commissioned a Blue Team to review the Office of Space Communications (Code O) Core Program and determine how the program could be conducted faster, better, and cheaper. Since there was no corresponding Red Team for the Code O Blue Team, the Blue Team assumed a Red Team independent attitude and challenged the status quo, including current work processes, functional distinctions, interfaces, and information flow, as well as traditional management and system development practices. The Blue Team's unconstrained, non-parochial, and imaginative look at NASA's space communications program produced a simplified representation of the space communications infrastructure that transcends organizational and functional boundaries, in addition to existing systems and facilities. Further, the Blue Team adapted the 'faster, better, cheaper' charter to be relevant to the multi-mission, continuous nature of the space communications program and to serve as a gauge for improving customer services concurrent with achieving more efficient operations and infrastructure life cycle economies. This simplified representation, together with the adapted metrics, offers a future view and process model for reengineering NASA's space communications to remain viable in a constrained fiscal environment. Code O remains firm in its commitment to improve productivity, effectiveness, and efficiency. In October 1992, the Associate Administrator reconstituted the Blue Team as the Code O Success Team (COST) to serve as a catalyst for change. In this paper, the COST presents the chronicle and significance of the simplified representation and adapted metrics, and their application during the FY 1993-1994 activities.

Hornstein, Rhoda Shaller↗
NASA NTRS1993

A systems engineering initiative for NASA's space communications

In addition to but separate from the Red and Blue Teams commissioned by the NASA Administrator, NASA's Associate Administrator for Space Communications commissioned a Blue Team to review the Office of Space Communications (Code O) Core Program and determine how the program could be conducted faster, better, and cheaper, without compromising safety. Since there was no corresponding Red Team for the Code O Blue Team, the Blue Team assumed a Red Team independent attitude and challenged the status quo. The Blue Team process and results are summarized. The Associate Administrator for Space Communications subsequently convened a special management session to discuss the significance and implications of the Blue Team's report and to lay the groundwork and teamwork for the next steps, including the transition from engineering systems to systems engineering. The methodology and progress toward realizing the Code O Family vision and accomplishing the systems engineering initiative for NASA's space communications are presented.

Hornstein, Rhoda S.↗
DOE OSTI2024

Autonomous anomaly detection of proliferation in the AGN-201 nuclear reactor digital twin

The expansion of global nuclear power necessitates advanced methods for analyzing proliferation indicators. This study introduces a novel application of the Isolation Forest Machine Learning (IFML) algorithm within a digital twin (DT) of the AGN-201 nuclear reactor to autonomously detect anomalies. Leveraging real-time operational data from the AGN-201 DT, the IFML algorithm identifies outliers without prior data labeling and operates as a lightweight, complementary approach to traditional physics-based anomaly detection methods for nuclear safeguards. In a simulated Red vs. Blue team exercise, the IFML algorithm successfully detected six significant unseen anomalies related to reactivity changes, achieving an accuracy of 99% for identifying operational deviationxs. These anomalies, caused by deliberate perturbations, were detected alongside known physics-based models, underscoring the potential of IFML to enhance real-time monitoring without displacing traditional methods. Further, this study highlights the applicability of IFML in nuclear environments by providing an additional, redundant layer of anomaly detection to improve safeguards and operational safety in complex systems.

46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗
NASA NTRS1997

STS-83 Day 02

On this second day of the STS-83 mission, the flight crew, Cmdr. James D. Halsell, Jr. Pilot Susan L. Still, Payload Cmdr, Janice E. Voss, Mission Specialists Michael L. Gernhardt and Donald A. Thomas, and Payload Specialists Gregory T. Linteris and Roger K. Crouch can be seen setting up experiments for studying the properties of combustion and the behavior of metals, materials, and fluids in the absence of gravity. The astronauts are split into red and blue teams, each working a 12-hour shift, to allow around-the-clock operations in the pressurized Spacelab science module in Columbia's cargo bay. Thomas is seen activating the Large Isothermal Furnace (LIF) experiment and the Expedite the Processing of Experiments to the International Space Station (EXPRESS) Rack while Linteris continues the activation of Protein Crystal Growth experiments.

Source record↗